forked from OSchip/llvm-project
18 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
Roman Lebedev
|
a5baf86744 |
AMD BdVer2 (Piledriver) Initial Scheduler model
Summary:
# Overview
This is somewhat partial.
* Latencies are good {F7371125}
* All of these remaining inconsistencies //appear// to be noise/noisy/flaky.
* NumMicroOps are somewhat good {F7371158}
* Most of the remaining inconsistencies are from `Ld` / `Ld_ReadAfterLd` classes
* Actual unit occupation (pipes, `ResourceCycles`) are undiscovered lands, i did not really look there.
They are basically verbatum copy from `btver2`
* Many `InstRW`. And there are still inconsistencies left...
To be noted:
I think this is the first new schedule profile produced with the new next-gen tools like llvm-exegesis!
# Benchmark
I realize that isn't what was suggested, but i'll start with some "internal" public real-world benchmark i understand - [[ https://github.com/darktable-org/rawspeed | RawSpeed raw image decoding library ]].
Diff (the exact clang from trunk without/with this patch):
```
Comparing /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-old/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench to /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-new/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench
Benchmark Time CPU Time Old Time New CPU Old CPU New
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0607 -0.0604 234 219 233 219
Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0630 -0.0626 233 219 233 219
Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.2581 +0.2587 1 2 1 2
Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0770 -0.0767 144 133 144 133
Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0767 -0.0763 144 133 144 133
Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4170 -0.4156 1 0 1 0
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0271 -0.0270 463 450 463 450
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0093 -0.0093 453 449 453 449
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.7280 -0.7280 13 4 13 4
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0004 0.0004 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0065 -0.0065 569 565 569 565
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0077 -0.0077 569 564 569 564
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +1.0077 +1.0068 2 5 2 5
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0220 0.0199 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0006 +0.0007 312 312 312 312
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0031 +0.0032 311 312 311 312
Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.7069 -0.7072 4 1 4 1
Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0004 0.0004 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0015 -0.0015 141 141 141 141
Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0010 -0.0011 141 141 141 141
Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.1486 -0.1456 0 0 0 0
Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.6139 0.8766 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0008 -0.0005 60 60 60 60
Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0006 -0.0002 60 60 60 60
Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.1467 -0.1390 0 0 0 0
Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0137 0.0137 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0002 +0.0002 275 275 275 275
Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0015 -0.0014 275 275 275 275
Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +3.3687 +3.3587 0 2 0 2
Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.4041 0.3933 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0004 +0.0004 67 67 67 67
Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0000 -0.0000 67 67 67 67
Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.1947 +0.1995 0 0 0 0
Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0074 0.0001 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0092 +0.0074 547 542 25 25
Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0054 +0.0115 544 541 25 25
Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4086 -0.3486 8 5 0 0
Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.3320 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0015 +0.0204 218 218 12 12
Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0001 +0.0203 218 218 12 12
Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.2259 +0.2023 1 1 0 0
GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0001 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0209 -0.0179 96 94 90 88
GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0182 -0.0155 95 93 90 88
GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.6164 -0.2703 2 1 2 1
Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0098 -0.0098 176 175 176 175
Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0126 -0.0126 176 174 176 174
Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_stddev +6.9789 +6.9157 0 2 0 2
Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0237 -0.0238 474 463 474 463
Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0267 -0.0267 473 461 473 461
Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.7179 +0.7178 3 5 3 5
Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.6837 0.6554 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0014 -0.0013 1375 1373 1375 1373
Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0018 +0.0019 1371 1374 1371 1374
Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.7457 -0.7382 11 3 10 3
Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0080 -0.0289 22 22 10 10
Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0070 -0.0287 22 22 10 10
Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +1.0977 +0.6614 0 0 0 0
Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0132 +0.0967 35 36 10 11
Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0132 +0.0956 35 36 10 11
Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.0407 -0.1695 0 0 0 0
Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0331 +0.1307 13 13 6 6
Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0430 +0.1373 12 13 6 6
Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.9006 -0.8847 1 0 0 0
Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0016 0.0010 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0023 -0.0024 395 394 395 394
Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0029 -0.0030 395 394 395 393
Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.0275 -0.0375 1 1 1 1
Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0232 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0047 +0.0039 114 113 28 28
Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0050 +0.0037 114 113 28 28
Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.0599 -0.2683 1 1 0 0
Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0206 +0.0207 405 414 405 414
Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0204 +0.0205 405 414 405 414
Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.2155 +0.2212 1 1 1 1
Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0109 -0.0108 147 145 147 145
Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0104 -0.0103 147 145 147 145
Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4919 -0.4800 0 0 0 0
Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0149 -0.0147 220 217 220 217
Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0173 -0.0169 221 217 220 217
Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_stddev +1.0337 +1.0341 1 3 1 3
Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0001 0.0001 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0019 -0.0019 194 193 194 193
Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0021 -0.0021 194 193 194 193
Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4441 -0.4282 0 0 0 0
Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.4263 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25
Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0258 -0.0006 81 83 19 19
Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0235 -0.0011 81 82 19 19
Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.1634 +0.1070 1 1 0 0
```
{F7443905}
If we look at the `_mean`s, the time column, the biggest win is `-7.7%` (`Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2`),
and the biggest loose is `+3.3%` (`Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2`);
Overall: mean `-0.7436%`, median `-0.23%`, `cbrt(sum(time^3))` = `-8.73%`
Looks good so far i'd say.
llvm-exegesis details:
{F7371117} {F7371125}
{F7371128} {F7371144} {F7371158}
Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon, andreadb, courbet, avt77, spatel, GGanesh
Reviewed By: andreadb
Subscribers: javed.absar, gbedwell, jfb, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52779
llvm-svn: 345463
|
|
|
Roman Lebedev
|
a51921877a |
[NFC][X86] Baseline tests for AMD BdVer2 (Piledriver) Scheduler model
Adding the baseline tests in a preparatory NFC commit, so that the actual commit shows the *diff*. Yes, i'm aware that a few of these codegen-based sched tests are testing wrong instructions, i will fix that afterwards. For https://reviews.llvm.org/D52779 llvm-svn: 345462 |
|
|
Andrea Di Biagio
|
b6022aa8d9 |
[X86][BtVer2] correctly model the latency/throughput of LEA instructions.
This patch fixes the latency/throughput of LEA instructions in the BtVer2
scheduling model.
On Jaguar, A 3-operands LEA has a latency of 2cy, and a reciprocal throughput of
1. That is because it uses one cycle of SAGU followed by 1cy of ALU1. An LEA
with a "Scale" operand is also slow, and it has the same latency profile as the
3-operands LEA. An LEA16r has a latency of 3cy, and a throughput of 0.5 (i.e.
RThrouhgput of 2.0).
This patch adds a new TIIPredicate named IsThreeOperandsLEAFn to X86Schedule.td.
The tablegen backend (for instruction-info) expands that definition into this
(file X86GenInstrInfo.inc):
```
static bool isThreeOperandsLEA(const MachineInstr &MI) {
return (
(
MI.getOpcode() == X86::LEA32r
|| MI.getOpcode() == X86::LEA64r
|| MI.getOpcode() == X86::LEA64_32r
|| MI.getOpcode() == X86::LEA16r
)
&& MI.getOperand(1).isReg()
&& MI.getOperand(1).getReg() != 0
&& MI.getOperand(3).isReg()
&& MI.getOperand(3).getReg() != 0
&& (
(
MI.getOperand(4).isImm()
&& MI.getOperand(4).getImm() != 0
)
|| (MI.getOperand(4).isGlobal())
)
);
}
```
A similar method is generated in the X86_MC namespace, and included into
X86MCTargetDesc.cpp (the declaration lives in X86MCTargetDesc.h).
Back to the BtVer2 scheduling model:
A new scheduling predicate named JSlowLEAPredicate now checks if either the
instruction is a three-operands LEA, or it is an LEA with a Scale value
different than 1.
A variant scheduling class uses that new predicate to correctly select the
appropriate latency profile.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D49436
llvm-svn: 337469
|
|
|
Puyan Lotfi
|
43e94b15ea |
Followup on Proposal to move MIR physical register namespace to '$' sigil.
Discussed here: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-January/120320.html In preparation for adding support for named vregs we are changing the sigil for physical registers in MIR to '$' from '%'. This will prevent name clashes of named physical register with named vregs. llvm-svn: 323922 |
|
|
Gadi Haber
|
2cf601f28f |
[X86][Haswell]: Updating the scheduling information for the Haswell subtarget.
Updated the scheduling information for the Haswell subtarget with the following changes: Regrouped the instructions after adding appropriate load + store latencies. Added scheduling for missing instructions such as the GATHER instrs. The changes were made after revisiting the latencies impact of all memory uOps. Reviewers: RKSimon, zvi, craig.topper, apilipenko Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40021 Change-Id: Iaf6c1f5169add1552845a8a566af4e5a359217a7 llvm-svn: 320137 |
|
|
Francis Visoiu Mistrih
|
a8a83d150f |
[CodeGen] Use MachineOperand::print in the MIRPrinter for MO_Register.
Work towards the unification of MIR and debug output by refactoring the interfaces. For MachineOperand::print, keep a simple version that can be easily called from `dump()`, and a more complex one which will be called from both the MIRPrinter and MachineInstr::print. Add extra checks inside MachineOperand for detached operands (operands with getParent() == nullptr). https://reviews.llvm.org/D40836 * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/kill: ([^ ]+) ([^ ]+)<def> ([^ ]+)/kill: \1 def \2 \3/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/kill: ([^ ]+) ([^ ]+) ([^ ]+)<def>/kill: \1 \2 def \3/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/kill: def ([^ ]+) ([^ ]+) ([^ ]+)<def>/kill: def \1 \2 def \3/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/<def>//g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<kill>/killed \1/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<imp-use,kill>/implicit killed \1/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<dead>/dead \1/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<def[ ]*,[ ]*dead>/dead \1/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<imp-def[ ]*,[ ]*dead>/implicit-def dead \1/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<imp-def>/implicit-def \1/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<imp-use>/implicit \1/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<internal>/internal \1/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" -o -name "*.s" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/([^ ]+)<undef>/undef \1/g' llvm-svn: 320022 |
|
|
Francis Visoiu Mistrih
|
25528d6de7 |
[CodeGen] Unify MBB reference format in both MIR and debug output
As part of the unification of the debug format and the MIR format, print MBB references as '%bb.5'. The MIR printer prints the IR name of a MBB only for block definitions. * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)->getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(*\1)/g' * find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)\.getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(\1)/g' * find . \( -name "*.txt" -o -name "*.s" -o -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#([0-9]+)/%bb.\1/g' * grep -nr 'BB#' and fix Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40422 llvm-svn: 319665 |
|
|
Francis Visoiu Mistrih
|
9d7bb0cb40 |
[CodeGen] Print register names in lowercase in both MIR and debug output
As part of the unification of the debug format and the MIR format, always print registers as lowercase. * Only debug printing is affected. It now follows MIR. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40417 llvm-svn: 319187 |
|
|
Gadi Haber
|
323f2e1715 |
[X86][Broadwell] Added the instruction scheduling information for the Broadwell CPU.
Adding the scheduling information for the Browadwell (BDW) CPU target. This patch adds the instruction scheduling information for the Broadwell (BDW) architecture target by adding the file X86SchedBroadwell.td located under the X86 Target. We used the scheduling information retrieved from the Broadwell architects in order to create the file. The scheduling information includes latency, number of micro-Ops and used ports by each BDW instruction. The patch continues the scheduling replacement and insertion effort started with the SandyBridge (SNB) target in r310792, the Haswell (HSW) target in r311879, the SkylakeClient (SKL) target in rL313613 + rL315978 and the SkylakeServer (SKX) in rL315175. Performance fluctuations may be expected due to code alignment effects. Reviewers: zvi, RKSimon, craig.topper Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39054 Change-Id: If6f799e5ff60e1091c8d43b05ea78c53581bae01 llvm-svn: 316492 |
|
|
Gadi Haber
|
85d99b4310 |
[X86][Broadwell] Added the broadwell cpu to the scheduling regression tests.<NFC>
NFC. Added the Broadwell cpu and the BROADWELL prefix to all the scheduling regression tests, as part of prepartion for a larger commit of adding all Broadwell scheduiling. Reviewers: RKSimon, zvi, aaboud Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38994 Change-Id: I54bc9065168844c107b1729fcdc1d311ce3ea0a9 llvm-svn: 315998 |
|
|
Gadi Haber
|
1e0f1f476a |
[X86][SKL] Updated scheduling information for the SkylakeClient target
Updated the scheduling information for the SkylakeClient target with the following changes: 1. regrouped the instructions after adding load and store latencies. 2. regrouped the instructions after adding identified missing ports in several groups. The changes were made after revisiting the latencies impact of all the load and store uOps. Reviewers: zvi, RKSimon, craig.topper Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38727 Change-Id: I778a308cc11e490e8fa5e27e2047412a1dca029f llvm-svn: 315978 |
|
|
Gadi Haber
|
2b132eb4f8 |
[X86][SKYLAKE] Update regression test to differentiate between HASWELL and SKYLAKE scheduling.<NFC>
NFC. Updated 6 regression tests to differentiate between HASWELL and SKYLAKE scheduling information. The fix is in preparation of a patch to update the information of the Skylake Client scheduling to include the appropriate load and store latencies. Reviewers: zvi, RKSimon Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38685 Change-Id: Ifc6b98d9eaf266913698f24c766fd994fc977555 llvm-svn: 315291 |
|
|
Ashutosh Nema
|
bfcac0b480 |
AMD family 17h (znver1) scheduler model update.
Summary: This patch enables the following: 1) Regex based Instruction itineraries for integer instructions. 2) The instructions are grouped as per the nature of the instructions (move, arithmetic, logic, Misc, Control Transfer). 3) FP instructions and their itineraries are added which includes values for SSE4A, BMI, BMI2 and SHA instructions. Patch by Ganesh Gopalasubramanian Reviewers: RKSimon, craig.topper Subscribers: vprasad, shivaram, ddibyend, andreadb, javed.absar, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36617 llvm-svn: 312237 |
|
|
Gadi Haber
|
d76f7b824e |
[X86][Haswell] Updating HSW instruction scheduling information
This patch completely replaces the instruction scheduling information for the Haswell architecture target by modifying the file X86SchedHaswell.td located under the X86 Target. We used the scheduling information retrieved from the Haswell architects in order to replace and modify the existing scheduling. The patch continues the scheduling replacement effort started with the SNB target in r307529 and r310792. Information includes latency, number of micro-Ops and used ports by each HSW instruction. Please expect some performance fluctuations due to code alignment effects. Reviewers: RKSimon, zvi, aymanmus, craig.topper, m_zuckerman, igorb, dim, chandlerc, aaboud Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36663 llvm-svn: 311879 |
|
|
Chandler Carruth
|
98c51cbee1 |
[x86] Teach the "generic" x86 CPU to avoid patterns that are slow on
widely used processors. This occured to me when I saw that we were generating 'inc' and 'dec' when for Haswell and newer we shouldn't. However, there were a few "X is slow" things that we should probably just set. I've avoided any of the "X is fast" features because most of those would be pretty serious regressions on processors where X isn't actually fast. The slow things are likely to be negligible costs on processors where these aren't slow and a significant win when they are slow. In retrospect this seems somewhat obvious. Not sure why we didn't do this a long time ago. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36947 llvm-svn: 311318 |
|
|
Andrew V. Tischenko
|
d56595184b |
Support itineraries in TargetSubtargetInfo::getSchedInfoStr - Now if the given instr does not have sched model then we try to calculate the latecy/throughput with help of itineraries.
Differential Revision https://reviews.llvm.org/D35997 llvm-svn: 309666 |
|
|
Craig Topper
|
106b5b6856 |
AMD znver1 Initial Scheduler model
Summary:
This patch adds the following
1. Adds a skeleton scheduler model for AMD Znver1.
2. Introduces the znver1 execution units and pipes.
3. Caters the instructions based on the generic scheduler classes.
4. Further additions to the scheduler model with instruction itineraries will be carried out incrementally based on
a. Instructions types
b. Registers used
5. Since itineraries are not added based on instructions, throughput information are bound to change when incremental changes are added.
6. Scheduler testcases are modified accordingly to suit the new model.
Patch by Ganesh Gopalasubramanian. With minor formatting tweaks from me.
Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon
Subscribers: javed.absar, shivaram, ddibyend, vprasad
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D35293
llvm-svn: 308411
|
|
|
Simon Pilgrim
|
948eca371e |
[X86] Add LEA scheduling tests
llvm-svn: 308180 |